STEAM-WATER STRATIFIED FLOW IN T-JUNCTIONS – EXPERIMENTS AND MODELLING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimental data on dividing steam-water two-phase stratified flow in T-junctions with horizontal inlet and both horizontally and vertically downward branches are presented in this paper. The measurements included inlet liquid level and run and branch fully developed void fraction. These measurements were used to describe the effects of the inlet flow conditions and junction geometry (relative branch diameter and orientation) on phase redistribution. The data covered the range of inlet steam and water superficial velocities from 1.5 to 5.0 m/s and 0.05 to 0.09 m/s respectively. Under these conditions, which have not been previously examined, the extent of phase redistribution was greatly affected by the inlet superficial gas velocity (uGS), and the junction geometry. The effect of inlet superficial water velocity (uLS) on the redistribution characteristics was less significant for the range of data tested. A model for the phase redistribution of stratified flow in T-junctions is developed. It consists of two submodels accounting for the distribution in the main inlet pipe and for phase redistribution in the junction. The model was found to be able to predict the data for smooth stratified flow very well. For wavy inlet flow, the model overpredicted the phase separation data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".